;)
The Commentariat -- December 10, 2019
Late Morning/Afternoon Update:
O No, No Yoho! Chandelis Duster of CNN: "Florida Republican Rep. Ted Yoho announced on Tuesday he will not seek another term, saying he will 'pass the baton onto a new generation' wortand honoring his campaign promise not to serve more than four terms."
Spencer Hsu of the Washington Post: "Federal prosecutors on Tuesday recommended that former deputy Trump campaign chairman Rick Gates serve no prison time, citing his 'extraordinary assistance' in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III's Russia investigation, according to a new court filing. Prosecutors said his cooperation is continuing, without making details public."
Niv Elis of the Hill: "House Democrats and the White House have struck a deal on a historic trade deal to update the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced Tuesday. Pelosi announced the deal on a head spinning day in Washington just one hou after she joined Democrats in setting out two articles of impeachment against Trump." Mrs. McC: Pelosi emphasized that the deal was much better for American workers than the deal Trump struck a year ago, and she thanked AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka for his assistance throughout the process. "The AFL-CIO announced Tuesday it would back the trade agreement...." Update: The New York Times report, which has far more detail, is here. ~~~
~~~ David Lynch of the Washington Post: "House Democrats took credit Tuesday for rewriting key parts of President Trump's new North American trade deal to include new protections for workers' rights and to scrap a provision they said would have led to high prescription drug prices. 'There is no question that this trade agreement is much better than NAFTA. It is infinitely better than what was initially proposed by the administration,' said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, speaking hours before representatives of the U.S., Mexico and Canada are expected to sign the revised deal at a meeting in Mexico City. 'We're declaring victory for the American worker.' In a major win for the Trump administration, the nation's largest labor federation backed the compromise.... [AFL-CIO President Richard] Trumka called the revised accord 'a vast improvement over both the original NAFTA and the flawed proposal brought forward in 2017.' The agreement is the first to include 'enforceable labor standards,' which will include inspections of suspect manufacturing sites in Mexico, he said. In a series of Twitter posts Tuesday, Trump hailed the breakthrough." Mrs. McC: ... with ridiculous hyperbole.
~~~~~~~~~~
** Nicholas Fandos of the New York Times: "House Democratic leaders announced on Tuesday that they would move ahead this week with two articles of impeachment against President Trump charging him with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, accusing him of violating the Constitution when he pressed Ukraine for help in the 2020 election. Speaking from a wood-paneled reception room just off the floor of the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and leaders of several key committees said that Mr. Trump's actions toward Ukraine, and his efforts to block Congress's attempt to investigate, had left them no choice but to pursue one of the Constitution's gravest remedies. The move will bring a sitting president to the brink of impeachment for only the fourth time in American history."
Andrew Desiderio, et al., of Politico: "House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment, accusing ... Donald Trump of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The Judiciary Committee is slated to vote on the articles later this week, setting up a full House vote next week.In a news conference announcing the articles Tuesday morning, Democrats said Trump put his personal political interests over U.S. national security by pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political rivals." This is a breaking update of an earlier report. The breaking Washington Post story is here.
Nicholas Fandos of the New York Times: "House Democrats delivered a scathing summation of their impeachment case against President Trump on Monday, arguing that the president's conduct posed a 'clear and present danger' to the 2020 election and national security. In a contentious hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, Democratic lawyers told lawmakers drafting impeachment articles that the evidence against Mr. Trump was overwhelming and urgent. Summarizing the findings of a two-month investigation by the Intelligence Committee, they asserted that the president had put his personal political interests above those of the nation in soliciting re-election help from Ukraine, and then tried to conceal his actions from Congress.... The presentations by [Intel Committee lawyer Daniel] Goldman and a Democratic lawyer for the Judiciary Committee will form the basis for a debate in the committee, expected to begin as soon as Wednesday, over articles of impeachment charging a president with high crimes and misdemeanors...."
Rachel Bade, et al., of the Washington Post: "Democrats are expected to unveil two articles of impeachment against President Trump on Tuesday that will focus on abuse of power and obstructing Congress and would be voted on by the full House next week, according to three officials familiar with the matter. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) met with Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) and other committee chairmen Monday night after a nine-hour hearing in which a Democratic counsel laid out the party's case against Trump. The three officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private talks, cautioned that the plan had not been finalized. Leaving a meeting with Pelosi, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.) told reporters that he and the chairmen of other House committees would announce specific articles at a news conference at 9 a.m. Tuesday." The AP story is here. ~~~
~~~ Heather Caygle, et al., of Politico: "The Judiciary Committee plans to vote on the articles on Thursday, setting up a vote on the House floor next week to make Trump the third president in history to be impeached. The markup will be the last major step before the House votes to formally impeach Trump."
Jonathan Chait: "The House Republican impeachment defense of President Trump has been an experiment in pointillistic surrealism, in which disconnected pieces of information -- some true, some false -- are slushed together into a dreamlike haze in which nothing is certain. The most emblematic moment in this defense came during Monday's impeachment hearings when Steve Castor, the Republican lead counsel, answered a series of simple, obvious questions about President Trump's motives to discredit Joe Biden. Or at least the questions were expected to be simple and obvious. In Castor's hands, they were rendered obtuse and enigmatic. 'Would you agree that Joe Biden was a leading contender to face President Trump in 2020?,' asked the Democratic lawyer. Castor shook his head, 'I wouldn't agree with that.'... Castor refused even to concede that Trump had asked Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate the Bidens." Mrs. McC: Castor was testifying under oath.
MEANWHILE, in the Gallery.... Melissa Quinn of CBS News: "An Infowars host interrupted the opening minutes of the House Judiciary Committee's impeachment hearing on Monday, accusing Chairman Jerry Nadler and other Democrats of committing 'treason' while declaring President Trump innocent. The protester, Owen Shroyer, began shouting just seconds after Nadler gaveled in the hearing and posted live video of the interruption to his Twitter feed.... Shroyer is the host of 'The War Room' on Infowars, the fringe outlet that traffics in right-wing conspiracy theories." Mrs. McC: Shame on the Gestapo-style capitol police for violating Shroyer's First Amendment rights & all. In fairness, they did give him copy for his show.
The Justice Department's Inspector General's Report
Karoun Demirjian, et al., of the Washington Post: "A long-awaited Justice Department inspector general's report examining the FBI's investigation into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia rebuts allegations of illegal spying and that political bias played a role in the probe begun ahead of the 2016 election, but finds serious faults in other areas, according to a copy of the document obtained by The Washington Post. The inspector general concludes that the FBI had an 'authorized purpose' to initiate the investigation and that the bureau's use of confidential informants was in compliance with the rules. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said the inspector general had 'completely demolished' some of conservatives' assertions about the origins of the probe, though his investigators did find some problems.... In particular, he said the inspector general had rebutted claims that Trump campaign advisers were illegally surveilled or entrapped, or that political motive was 'in any way a factor.' But the report also faults the FBI for 'significant inaccuracies and omissions' in the FBI's applications to secretly monitor a former Trump campaign adviser [Carter Page] and asserts that agents 'failed to meet the basic obligation' to ensure the applications were 'scrupulously accurate.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ A pdf of the report, via the Justice Department, is here. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Charlie Savage & Adam Goldman of the New York Times: "A long-awaited report by the Justice Department's inspector general released on Monday sharply criticized the F.B.I.'s handling of a wiretap application used in the early stages of its Russia investigation but exonerated former bureau leaders of President Trump's accusations that they engaged in a politicized conspiracy to sabotage him. Investigators uncovered 'no documentary or testimonial evidence' of political bias behind official actions related to the investigation, known as Crossfire Hurricane, said the report, which totaled more than 400 pages. The F.B.I. had sufficient evidence in July 2016 to lawfully open the investigation, and its use of informants to approach campaign aides followed procedures, the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, determined.... The findings on the wiretap application showed that when it mattered most -- with the stakes the greatest and no room for error -- F.B.I. officials still made numerous and serious mistakes in wielding a powerful surveillance tool. Mr. Horowitz's discovery calls into question the bureau's surveillance practices in routine cases without such high-stakes political implications." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Politico's Headline: "Watchdog report rips FBI handling of Russia probe." Josh Gerstein: "A highly anticipated Justice Department review of the origins of the federal investigation into potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia found no direct evidence of political bias in the launching of the probe, but identified an embarrassing slew of inaccuracies and omissions by the FBI that marred requests for court-ordered surveillance of a former Trump campaign adviser. The report from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz also revealed for the first time that the FBI used a confidential source to approach an unidentified high-level Trump campaign official in September 2016 who was never the subject of any investigation. The approach revealed nothing of value to the probe, the review found." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
Bill Barr's Hail Trump
~~~ AND Bill Barr really did not care for Horowitz's main conclusion. Gerstein: "Attorney General Bill Barr endorsed Horowitz's critique of the FBI's handling of the surveillance process, but rejected the inspector general's conclusion that the FBI had an adequate 'predicate' for the decision to launch the investigation into the Trump campaign in July 2016. 'The Inspector General's report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken,' Barr said in a statement. 'It is also clear that, from its inception, the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory. Nevertheless, the investigation and surveillance was pushed forward for the duration of the campaign and deep into President Trump's administration.'" Mrs. McC: IOW, "I'm pissed off Horowitz doesn't back up my fake 'spying' claim." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Barr's full statement is here. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ AND Barr Swats at Christopher Steele. Katie Benner of the New York Times: "Attorney General William P. Barr recently approved making public new details about a former F.B.I. informant at the heart of conservatives' allegations about the Russia investigation, deciding to release information that had been blacked out in ... [the] inspector general's report.... A representative from the office of the Justice Department inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, told the former F.B.I. informant, Christopher Steele, on Sunday that the Justice Department had decided to allow for the release of the information, two people briefed on the situation said late on Sunday. Mr. Steele was given no details about the information itself, nor was he told how it would affect the report's portrayal of him, the people said.... The notice to Mr. Steele on the eve of the report's release was highly unusual. Like the other witnesses interviewed for the inspector general's report, Mr. Steele had earlier reviewed the findings that are pertinent to him, and he was given a chance to comment on them. In this case, Mr. Horowitz's office did not detail for him the additional information and gave him no opportunity to respond for the report to be released on Monday." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Julia Macfarlane of ABC News: "In 2007, Ivanka Trump met [Christopher] Steele at a dinner and they began corresponding about the possibility of future work together.... The following year, the two exchanged emails about meeting up near Trump Tower, according to several emails seen by ABC News. And the two did meet at Trump Tower.... The inspector general's report mentions a meeting with a 'Trump family member' there. They suggest Ivanka Trump and Steele stayed in touch via emails over the next several years. In one 2008 exchange they discussed dining together in New York at a restaurant just blocks from Trump Tower. Ivanka Trump worked as an executive vice president at the Trump Organization, managing a range of foreign real estate projects, including in parts of the world where Steele's firm, Orbis Business Intelligence touted expertise.... In his discussion with investigators from the inspector general'office, Steele cited his past cordial relationship with Ivanka Trump as reason to believe that he was not biased against her. 'If anything he was "favorably predisposed" towards the Trump family before he began his research,' he told the investigators, the report says." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Katie Benner of the New York Times: "Mr. Barr's willingness to side with Mr. Trump over law enforcement, even when it contradicts his own department's assessments, illustrates why he is one of Mr. Trump's most important allies.... John H. Durham, a federal prosecutor whom Mr. Barr appointed to run a separate criminal investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation, backed Mr. Barr's findings in his own highly unusual statement. 'Last month we advised the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report's conclusions as to predication and how the F.B.I. case was opened,' Mr. Durham said.... Christopher A. Wray, the director of the F.B.I., said that he accepted all of the report's findings, including that officials had enough reason to open the investigation, as did other F.B.I. defenders." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: In his statement, Durham also said, "Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S. Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report's conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened." You might want to read Benner's respectful "highly unusual" characterization (in both her reports linked above) as "highly politicized." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
AND Trump (Of Course) Claims that White Is Black and Down Is Up. Shannon Pettypiece of NBC News: "... Donald Trump said Monday that a new Justice Department report that found a solid legal basis for the original FBI investigation of his 2016 campaign had actually documented an 'attempted overthrow' of the government that was 'far worse than I ever thought possible.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Re: safari's comment below, here's video of Trump's, Bondi's & Conway's responses to the IG report.
** Caitlin Oprysko of Politico: DOJ Inspector general Michael Horowitz's report "debunked a number of conspiracy theories advanced by the president or his allies over the last several years. Here are some of the top claims refuted by Horowitz's report. The Steele dossier didn't play a role in opening the Russia probe.... Neither did Lisa Page or Peter Strzok.... [President] Obama never wiretapped Trump Tower.... The FBI didn't implant spies in Trump's campaign.... Joseph Mifsud was never an FBI informant[.]"
Annals of "Journalism," Ha Ha Ha. Justin Wise of the Hill: "Former FBI Director James Comey said Monday that 'Fox & Friends' canceled his scheduled appearance on the show after the release of a watchdog report that concluded FBI agents were not motivated by political bias when they launched investigations into associates of President Trump during the 2016 campaign. Comey said on Twitter that he had offered to appear on the morning program to answer all of the hosts' questions related to the highly anticipated Justice Department inspector general report. 'They booked me for tomorrow at 8 am. They just cancelled. Must have read the report,' said Comey, who was fired by Trump in 2017.... A Fox News spokesperson denied Comey's allegation, saying in a statement to The Hill that he 'was not booked and was never confirmed to appear on Fox & Friends.'" ~~~
~~~ Comey has an op-ed in the Washington Post lauding the report. Mrs. McC: I anticipated Comey's take would be a pile of gloat, but he actually makes good points. For instance: "Unfortunately, it appears that Barr will continue his practice of deriding the Justice Department when the facts don't agree with Trump's fiction. Pointing to his personally commissioned 'review' of the FBI's case-opening, Barr has declared it is too soon to conclude that the FBI was right to start an investigation. If his goal is simply to support the president's conspiracy theories, it will always be too soon to acknowledge the facts."
** The Remarkably Ephemeral Deep-State Conspiracy against Donald Trump. Mark Mazzetti of the New York Times: “President Trump and his allies spent months promising that a report on the origins of the F.B.I.'s Russia investigation would be a kind of Rosetta Stone for Trump-era conspiracy enthusiasts -- the key to unlocking the secrets of a government plot to keep Mr. Trump from being elected in 2016. On that point, the report by the Justice Department's inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, did not deliver, even as it found serious problems with how F.B.I. officials justified the surveillance of a Trump campaign aide to a federal court. But by the time it was released, the president, his attorney general, his supporters in Congress and the conservative news media had already declared victory and decamped for the next battle in the wider war to convince Americans of the enemies at home and abroad arrayed against the Trump presidency. They followed a script they have used for nearly three years: Engage in a choreographed campaign of presidential tweets, Fox News appearances and fiery congressional testimony to create expectations about finding proof of a 'deep state' campaign against Mr. Trump. And then, when the proof does not emerge, skew the results and prepare for the next opportunity to execute the playbook." ~~~
~~~ Josh Kovensky of TPM: "Attorney General Bill Barr scrambled on Monday to keep a main anti-DOJ conspiracy theory going, after Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a 476-page report finding that the FBI was justified in opening its Trump-Russia investigation." ~~~
~~~ Paul Waldman & Greg Sargent of the Washington Post: "... the Trump argument has been that the entire investigation was built on top of deeply nefarious motives -- that is, that the 'deep state' was corruptly conspiring to prevent Trump from being elected president -- and that it all was illegitimate. This was the argument of the president of the United States: that a law enforcement investigation into a foreign attack on our democracy was a 'hoax' and a 'witch hunt.'... [that] the real crime wasn't Russian sabotage of our election but the effort to investigate it. The inspector general report just wrecked numerous claims that Trump and his propagandists have made to justify that narrative. Perhaps this is why Attorney General William P. Barr, who has been himself working to invalidate that investigation, rushed to Trump's rescue.... There is no need to grant Barr even the slightest presumption of good faith...."
Brett Samuels of the Hill: "FBI Director Christopher Wray said Monday that the bureau is implementing more than 40 'corrective steps' in response to a Department of Justice inspector general report on the investigation into the Trump campaign and 2016 election interference. The report found the FBI's decision to launch and carry out the investigation targeting four Trump campaign officials was not affected by political bias, a conclusion Wray highlighted while also noting the bureau fully cooperated with the nearly two-year internal review by Inspector General Michael Horowitz. The report was, however, critical of certain aspects of the FBI's handling of the investigation[.]" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Pierre Thomas & Lucien Bruggeman of ABC News: "In a ... broadcast interview with ABC News, [FBI Director Christopher] Wray lamented 'actions described in this report that [he] considered unacceptable and unrepresentative of who we are as an institution.' But, he said it was 'important that the inspector general found that, in this particular instance, the investigation was opened with appropriate predication and authorization.'" Mrs. McC: So far, Wray is the only Trump administration official who has responded appropriately to the IG's report. ~~~
~~~ So Naturally.... Allan Smith of NBC News: "... Donald Trump on Tuesday blasted his 'current' FBI Director Christopher Wray -- whom the president appointed -- after the bureau head accepted the key finding of the Justice Department inspector general's report into the origins of the investigation into Trump's campaign and Russia.... 'I don't know what report current Director of the FBI Christopher Wray was reading, but it sure wasn't the one given to me,' tweeted Trump.... 'With that kind of attitude, he will never be able to fix the FBI, which is badly broken despite having some of the greatest men & women working there!'" ~~~
~~~ John Wagner & Matt Zapotosky of the Washington Post on Trump's knocking Chris Wray. "In earlier tweets Tuesday, Trump selectively highlighted findings from the inspector general's report by quoting Fox News commentators who said it documented 'very serious misconduct.'"
Shane Harris, et al., of the Washington Post: "The FBI had barely closed a politically volcanic investigation into Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server when it got a troubling tip about her rival's presidential campaign. On July 28, 2016, the bureau received information from an Australian diplomat, who said a Donald Trump campaign aide had 'suggested the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion from Russia' that Moscow could anonymously release damaging information about Clinton, according to the long-awaited Justice Department inspector general's report released Monday. The tip, vague as it was, shook senior FBI officials, who were already investigating suspected Russian interference in the 2016 campaign, including the theft of emails from the Democratic National Committee. Three days later, the FBI took the momentous decision to open a counterintelligence investigation of a presidential campaign, as the election season entered the home stretch.... Andrew McCabe, then the FBI's deputy director, said it was a 'tipping point' in the investigation of Russian interference. The decision to open Crossfire Hurricane, on July 31, was unanimous, McCabe said." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: But here's a question: is the FBI investigating Trump's meddling in the 2020 election? If not, why not? Bill Barr? We know DOJ & FBI are investigating the Three Stooges, but what about the guy who directed their operation? We also know DOJ shut down one inquiry into Trump's phone call with President Zelensky, but there's more to the scheme/conspiracy than the narrow matter DOJ rejected. Trump's jerking around Ukraine is essentially an extension of his cooperation with Russia in the 2016 election, and it has all the hallmarks of 2016 intervention, only worse, because this time Trump used the levers of the federal government to carry out his Ukraine scam.
Trump Is Nuts, Ctd. James Walker of Newsweek: "... Donald Trump put out more than 100 tweets on Sunday, sharing attacks on the impeachment inquiry with his 67 million followers. The commander-in-chief tweeted a total of 105 times yesterday, or a little more than four times per hour on average, with most of his activity taking place between 10 a.m. and 6.30 p.m. The majority of his posts were retweets of content posted by other Twitter users. Trump's tweets and re-posts on the platform were largely aimed at the impeachment process and Democrats leading the inquiry, but CNN and MMA fighter Tito Ortiz were also mentioned by the president." Mrs. McC: I think I've found the 400-pound man sitting on his bed. He's not in New Jersey; he's in Washington, D.C., and he's not hacking; he's tweeting. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Trump Is a Bigot, Ctd. Paul Krugman: "On Saturday Donald Trump gave a speech to the Israeli American Council in which he asserted that many in his audience were 'not nice people at all,' but that 'you have to vote for me' because Democrats would raise their taxes. Was he peddling an anti-Semitic stereotype, portraying Jews as money-grubbing types who care only about their wealth? Of course he was. You might possibly make excuses for his remarks if they were an isolated instance, but in fact Trump has done this sort of thing many times.... This particular anti-Semitic cliché -- that Jews are greedy, and that their political behavior is especially driven by their financial interests -- is empirically dead wrong. In fact, American Jews are much more liberal than you might expect given their economic situation.... The Trump administration is, beyond any reasonable doubt, an anti-democratic, white nationalist regime. And while it is not (yet) explicitly anti-Semitic, many of its allies are...."
Party on, Bill Barr. Jonathan O'Connell of the Washington Post: "Attorney General William P. Barr had planned to hold a 200-person holiday party at the Trump hotel in Washington Sunday night, but the event was rescheduled, according to a Justice Department spokeswoman. The spokeswoman declined to say when the event would take place but said it would still be at the Trump International Hotel, a choice that prompted critics to question Barr's independence from Trump, who still profits from his business while in office. Barr has been a key defender of President Trump, including Monday when he criticized an inspector general's report examining the FBI's investigation into possible coordination between Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia. Twice this week, Justice Department attorneys are defending Trump in court against suits claiming the president illegally benefits from his business while in office." Mrs. McC: Bill Barr is giving the middle finger to every single American who has at least a vague belief that the legal underpinnings of our system of government, however imperfectly executed, is what sets the U.S. apart from banana republics.
Maggie Miller of the Hill: "The National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC) published a draft report addressed to President Trump this week that found cyber threats to critical infrastructure pose an 'existential threat' to national security, and recommended 'bold action' in response. The NIAC, which is made up of industry officials and those from state and local governments involved in critical infrastructure, including former National Security Agency Deputy Director Richard Ledgett, strongly urged Trump to take action to protect energy, communications, and financial critical infrastructure.... The report found that China, Iran, and Russia have the ability to launch disruptive cyber attacks on U.S. critical infrastructure, including the electric grid, with [former Director of National Intelligence Dan] Coats noting specifically that 'Moscow is mapping our critical infrastructure with the long-term goal of being able to cause substantial damage.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Presidential Race 2020
Reid Epstein & Jonathan Martin of the New York Times: "Mayor Pete Buttigieg will disclose his management consulting clients, open his fund-raisers to reporters and reveal the names of people raising money for his presidential campaign, his campaign announced Monday, a series of significant concessions toward transparency for a candidate under increasing pressure to release more details about his personal employment history and campaign finances. announcements follow several days of intense questioning surrounding Mr. Buttigieg's work for McKinsey & Company, the management consulting firm that was his first post-college employer. The company said on Monday that it would allow Mr. Buttigieg to disclose the clients he worked for at the firm from 2007 to 2009, acceding to a request the Buttigieg campaign made last month and the candidate himself amplified in public last week."
Joe Can't Handle the Truth. Eric Levitz of New York: Hunter Biden's "work in Ukraine is unquestionably undermining his father's campaign. President Trump sees Burisma as the 'emails' of 2020: A story of mundane impropriety around which right-wing media can build an elaborate, incendiary conspiracy theory that energizes the GOP base and conveys a vague impression of Democratic corruption to low-information swing voters.... Yet [Joe] Biden has not bothered to prepare credible, coherent answers to those questions. In fact, the Democratic front-runner can't even respond to the most predictable queries on the issue without flying into a barely concealed rage.... The fact that Biden still can't answer reasonable questions about his candidacy's chief liability is completely disqualifying.... As the Democratic Party's standard-bearer, reciting polite, polished talking points about Hunter and Burisma will be a core responsibility of Biden's job. And by all appearances, he is unable or unwilling to do that." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: It's worth reading the whole post to get a handle on just how bad are Joe Biden's "answers" to questions about Hunter's Ukraine gambit. Levitz's post is akin to what P.D. Pepe & I discussed in the Comments last week, although Levitz goes further in arguing that Joe's lame responses are disqualifying. Joe Biden did not run for president in 2016 because of his sorrow over his son Beau's death. He should not run in 2020 because of his love for his son Hunter. And Barack Obama should do the right thing & urge Joe to drop out of the race. Step up, Barry.
Marianne Williamson, on the Other Hand, Is So Qualified. Tim Elfrink of the Washington Post: "Marianne Williamson took to Twitter early on Monday morning to express her horror at what she called President Trump's latest 'deeply sinister move. 'There is something deeply sinister about Trump pardoning Charles Manson, even posthumously,' the self-help guru and Democratic presidential candidate tweeted to her 2.8 million followers. 'Dog whistles of the very worst possible kind ...' -- excep that it never happened. In fact, since the murderous cult leader, who died in 2017, was convicted of California state criminal charges, Trump couldn't issue him a pardon even if he wanted to. Williamson later posted a follow-up tweet apologizing and noting that she was 'Glad To have been wrong.' But she soon deleted both the original tweet and the apology." Mrs. McC: It is so sexist & wrong to call women ditzy. Williamson is ditzy.
Congressional Races, Republican Style
Will Sommer of the Daily Beast: Businessman Omar Navarro, "a perennial Republican House candidate whose doomed bids against Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) have become a cause celebre on the right, was arrested Saturday on three felony charges.... San Francisco police arrested Navarro on Saturday night, after he was allegedly seen near ex-girlfriend DeAnna Lorraine Tesoriero's apartment. Tesoriero, a self-styled MAGA relationship expert who is running a quixotic congressional run of her own against Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), told The Daily Beast that she saw Navarro skulking outside her home late at night. Tesoriero said she then received a text from an unknown number with the message, 'Bitch, I came to see you.'... Navarro complained that, by calling the police on him, Tesoriero had violated Ronald Reagan's '11th Commandment,' an often-cited GOP precept warning Republicans not to criticize one another publicly." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Of course it's wrong to "criticize" a stalker. And you wonder why Republicans can't win in California. The best they've got are junior spy & walking nuisance-suit Devin Nunes & criminal Duncan Hunter. Just out of curiosity, why hasn't House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, another sterling California GOP rep, forced Hunter to resign? Katie Hill resigned under less serious circumstances, & Pelosi sure didn't beg her to stay on.
Patrick Spivek of the Texas Tribune: "Ronny Jackson, the former White House doctor and ... Donald Trump's onetime nominee to be secretary of veterans affairs, is running to replace retiring U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Clarendon[, Texas]. With hours until the filing deadline, Jackson, a former Navy rear admiral, arrived at the Texas GOP headquarters in Austin on Monday afternoon to submit paperwork for the seat. Trump nominated Jackson last year to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs, but he withdrew from consideration amid allegations of professional misconduct, including drinking on the job and overprescribing medication. He called the accusations 'completely false and fabricated.' After the nomination debacle, Jackson continued to work for the White House medical unit but not as the president's personal doctor. Jackson previously served as physician to Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama. Jackson retired from the Navy earlier this month, according to CNN, which said the retirement came even as the Defense Department's inspector general was still probing the allegations against him.... Jackson is at least the 13th candidate to enter the Republican primary for the ruby-red seat...." Jackson does not live in the Congressional district in which he is running.
Supremes Uphold Kentucky Law that Doctors Must Shame & Harass Women. David Li of NBC News: "The Supreme Court on Monday left in place a Kentucky law, mandating doctors perform ultrasounds and show fetal images to patients before they can perform abortions. The high court declined, without comment, to hear an appeal brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the state's lone abortion clinic. The Kentucky law, which requires a doctor to describe an ultrasound in detail while a pregnant woman hears the fetal heartbeat, was passed in 2017.... The ACLU had argued that the Kentucky statute had no medical basis and was designed only to coerce a woman into opting out of having an abortion." Mrs. McC: And that's your Trump/Roberts Supreme Court.
** Ben Holland of Bloomberg, republished in Yahoo! News: "Support for write-offs has been driven by Democratic presidential candidates. Elizabeth Warren says she'd cancel most of the $1.6 trillion in U.S. student loans. Bernie Sanders would go further -- erasing the whole lot, as well as $81 billion in medical debt. But it's coming from other directions too. In October, one of the Trump administration's senior student-loan officials resigned, calling for wholesale write-offs and describing the American way of paying for higher education as nuts.... The idea that debt can grow faster than the ability to repay, until it unbalances a society, was well understood thousands of years ago, according to Michael Hudson, an economist and historian. Last year he published 'And Forgive Them Their Debts,' a study of the Near East in biblical times and even earlier. That's where the tradition known as a 'jubilee' -- wiping the debt-slate clean -- has its roots. Rulers weren't motivated by charity, Hudson says. They were being pragmatic -- trying to make sure that citizens could meet their own needs and contribute to public projects, instead of just laboring to pay creditors. And it worked, he says. 'Societies that canceled the debts enjoyed stable growth for thousands of years.'"
Binyamin Appelbaum & Robert Hershey of the New York Times: "Paul A. Volcker, who helped shape American economic policy for more than six decades, most notably by leading the Federal Reserve's brute-force campaign to subdue inflation in the late 1970s and early '80s, died on Sunday in New York. He was 92.... MrVolcker, a towering, taciturn and somewhat rumpled figure, arrived in Washington as America's postwar economic hegemony was beginning to crumble. He would devote his professional life to wrestling with the consequences. As a Treasury Department official under Presidents John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon, Mr. Volcker waged a long, losing struggle to preserve the postwar international monetary system established by the Bretton Woods agreement." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Beyond the Beltway
Michigan. Emily Holden, et al., of the Guardian: "Executives at one of the world's largest utilities companies knew that families in Flint, Michigan, might be at risk of being poisoned by lead in their tap water months before the city publicly admitted the problem, according to internal company emails. Email exchanges in February 2015 between executives at Veolia and a city contractor show some senior employees were aware that lead from the city's pipes could be leaching into drinking water. They argued that city officials should be told to change Flint's water supply to protect residents. But the company never made that recommendation public. At the time, Veolia was exploring other lucrative contracts with the city."
New York. Oh. Josh Barro of New York: "There have been an awful lot of unwarranted victory laps in the last few days by opponents of New York's Amazon HQ2 subsidy deal. They point to the new lease Amazon has signed for office space on the West Side of Manhattan and ask, What would have been the point of giving Amazon $3 billion when it was going to do it for free all along? For the record, I didn't favor the Amazon subsidy deal, either.... But I still realize that what we're getting now is not at all what we would have gotten if the deal had gone through. This is a lease for about 300,000 square feet in an existing building to support 1,500 jobs in Manhattan. Under the subsidy proposal, Amazon intended to develop approximately 4 million square feet of new office space in Queens. It would have had to create 25,000 jobs to unlock the full subsidy package."
Way Beyond
Russia/Ukraine. Vladimir Isachenkov, et al., of the AP: "The presidents of Ukraine and Russia agreed Monday to revive the peace process on the bloody separatist conflict in eastern Ukraine and exchange all their prisoners, but they failed to resolve crucial issues such as a timeline on local elections and control of the borders in the rebel-held region. At the first meeting between new Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Russian President Vladimir Putin, the two leaders failed to find a compromise to bring an end to the 5-year-old war that has killed 14,000 people, emboldened the Kremlin and reshaped European geopolitics. But they did agree to try again in four months to find new solutions, said French President Emmanuel Macron, who mediated the talks along with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and called them 'fruitful' in that it brought all four leaders together." The Washington Post story is here. ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Gee, why wasn't the leader of Ukraine's great ally, the U.S.A., at the table cheering on Zelensky?
Russia. Paul MacInnes of the Guardian: "Russia has been handed a four-year ban from international sporting competition for a doping cover-up that means the country will not feature at the Tokyo Olympics next summer or the 2022 football World Cup in Qatar. An emergency meeting of the World Anti-Doping Agency on Monday unanimously voted to exclude Russia and also prevent it from hosting or bidding to host any global tournaments. The ban was imposed by Wada's executive committee after Russia was found to have tampered with laboratory data handed over to Wada as a condition for ending a previous three-year ban for state-sponsored doping." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
News Lede
NJ.com: "A shooting in Jersey City[, New Jersey,] has left multiple people dead, including a police officer, following an hours-long standoff at a food store. Two suspects and three civilians are dead in addition to the police officer, a 40-year-old married father of several children. The shooting is not believed to have been a terrorism attack. 'We have no inkling what the motive was yet,' Jersey City Police Chief Michael Kelly said at a Tuesday evening press conference. 'Our officers were under fire for hours.' Kelly said the civilians killed inside the store were killed by the suspects."
Share Article
Reader Comments (18)
Something switched inside my head when Dear Leader was asked about the IG report. You watch him assume the slouched, hanging head position. Then his mouth starts moving, and he stumbles to start the absolutely fraudulent narrative that the report says what it doesn't, but he meanders on track using his nonsensical, overly broad, hyperbolized vocabulary. Then he hands it off to his chief propagandists Pam Bondi & Kellyanne Conjob who gladly fear monger and further falsify the facts as if they literally live not only based on "alternate facts", but an "alternate reality". The contrasts between real vs fake, reality vs imaginary, facts vs lies, has hardly been so stark, and so effortless. And then you had the loyalists pile on and helped enforce the alternate reality. The whole GOP now joins in, unflinchingly. And not a contrarian voice.
I still want to believe that there exist a few Republican MoC that recognize Dear Leader as the "clear and present danger" to American democracy that he is. Sure, their cowardice is bottomless, they'll never raise their voice and they'll invent excuses all the way to their death bed and beyond, but they still "get it". Like, they drink the kool aid, but aren't drunk. They read the NYT and spin a better story, rather than fabricating a new one out of thin air.
If this theory holds, I'd be fascinated to know how they're physically feeling inside. The physiology of their bodies. Cramps. Migraines. Digestive problems. Depression. Stiff muscles.
How do they feel when they walk the halls of Congress and self-reflect on this moment? With all of the statesmen staring down at them from the walls as they pass by. With the history of the Republic always in their face. Driving by the Lincoln Memorial, knowing they've enabled a cult that would prefer to detonate Lincoln and replace him with Donald.
Do they ever walk around the halls of Congress with a pit in their stomach? Or are they, on the contrary, true fucking psychopaths? Completely lucid, clear-minded, hungry for a donut and coffee, thinking about their own reelection poll numbers and lining up the next vote to weaponize the judiciary for decades of pro-corporate rulings they'll be long dead to never see, in a mutated America, flopping in the wind between Democratic presidents who respect the rule of law and unaccountable Republican wanna-be autocrats building a pseudo corporatist monarchy.
Oh, to be a fly on the wall & a worm in their gut.
Help is on the way from Moscow. Traitortrump will meet today with
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. With orders from Putin? How to
deal with his Democratic Party enemies? Who knows.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/09/politics/donald-trump--sergei-
lavrov-meeting/index.html
Forrest, that Lavrov visit is downright creepy, isn't it? Oddly, I'm beginning to have some of the same feelings about Russia as my father did (see below). Is it time to revive talk of the Manchurian Candidate?
Missed the Sunday Sermon (or LTTE) deadline by two days, but in these helter-skelter times, what the hell!
"Recently, a jaw-dropping fifty-three percent of Republicans said they believe Donald Trump to be a better president than Abraham Lincoln (Newsweek.com).
Some have suggested the explanation is simple ignorance, that today’s Republicans don’t know much about the critical part Abraham Lincoln played in extending democracy’s promise to everyone. Maybe. But ignorance alone doesn’t fully chart the path the Party of Lincoln took to the Party of Trump.
In the late1960’s the Republican Party began to change its stripes. In the late 1950’s and middle 1960’s, a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats supported the controversial civil rights legislation Congress enacted (dailysignal.com). But seeing an opportunity, Nixon’s 1968 Republican presidential campaign deliberately appealed to the disgruntled southern Democrats who wished to maintain the old order of racial discrimination. By Reagan’s time in the 1980’s, the once-solid Democratic South was firmly in Republican hands. So much for Lincoln’s legacy. The two parties’ positions on civil rights had flipped.
More recently, the Republican Party has experienced another radical transformation. With the ascension of Trump, the anti-Soviet GOP, once eager to find a Communist under every rug, is becoming the “Gang of Putin” (washingtonpost.com). Support for Russia is rising among Republican voters (thehill.com); Republican leaders are using Russian propaganda to defend Trump’s meddling in our elections and in his impending impeachment (theatlantic.com); and even conservative talking heads like Tucker Carlson of Fox are asking what’s so bad about a dictator who prohibits free elections, invades other countries and imprisons or murders his political enemies (theguardian.com).
It’s a question which I wish I could ask my very Republican father. Though far more bothered by darker-hued skin than he ever admitted, his detestation for dictators and his love of democracy remained firm until his death.
I wonder what he’d think of today’s Gang of Putin."
safari––well done!!!! I happened to come upon a televised meeting with Trump that appeared to have something to do with education achievements: Betsy was present along with others who, before they spoke their piece, all thanked Trump for his "great achievements in this area" and I wondered what exactly they were and discovered he hadn't really done anything except agree with whatever it was these people had proposed. The honey drip was excruciating to watch––the bowing to the king for a bit of bread.
The hearings yesterday were exhausting ––over and over we heard the same scenarios and watched the Rebbies get all red in the face and yell a lot. And please–-somebody–-explain why when they take a vote on something the vote ALWAYS turns out the same ––so why bother? Since Dems make up a majority the vote favors them every time––yes, it's protocol but seems to me it's a bloody waste of time.
To go back to safari's comments: Joseph O'Neill, writing about the need for Dems to activate differently, said that Republican politicians, some Democratic officials seem not to grasp, are not guys in a bar with opinions differing from your own. They are people who have chosen to devote their lives to undermining the core interests of your supporters and their families and communities. He cites the example of Peter King's announcement of his retirement and was lauded by Schumer for being "principled" and having "stood head and shoulders above everyone else." If the Democratic Party is to remain viable that kind of thing has to stop.
O'Neill also asserts that once Trump is gone, Republicans will have an "epiphany" and discover inner moral resources. You could call Biden and his ilk Charlie Brown Democrats. They achieve, against all the available evidence, that Lucy van Pelt will one day let them kick the football, and eventually they hoof at the ball in the unconscious hope that Lucy will indeed whisk the ball away. This generation of whiffers views Republican dominance as natural and, ultimately, acceptable. And that, by george, ain't gonna cut it!
I hate to say I kinda feel like today seems like a Charlie Brown Democrats kind of day. Rather than be a culmination of historic proportions, it oddly feels more like the air deflating from the bike tires.
Only TWO articles of impeachment? After all the criming this Mafia Don has done for the last three years, they only went with two? Yeah, sur, two BIG ones. Just the other, the NYT had an op-ed laying 8 potential articles. And no talk of obstructing justice with the Mueller investigation? I fear Dems are being far too tepid, afraid of their own shadows right now.
Then, to really step on our own messaging and send a few pitchforks into our face, right after Nancy Pelosi gives her "solemn soldier" act on impeachment, she'll reappear a few hours later jazzed up and announcing a big achievement for Trump's fucking reelection by passing the United States Canada Mexico Refurbished Same Trade Deal (USCMRSTD?). Why? Why today? Why now? Why give him a reason to change the narrative?
Agree, Safari. The timing couldn't be worse.
And to add the expected insult to the old injuries, in this morning's paper I see no mention of any (or any significant?) improvments to the patent/pharmaceutical or environmental provisions of NAFTA 1.0 in the "new and improved" agreement.
My guess is that the Dems are overly senstive--as I can attest, a typical liberal weakness--to all the accusations that they have done "nothing," though they have passed hundreds of good bills that languish on Moscow Mitch's desk, and are just a little eager to prove the can "walk and chew gum" at the same time.
They don't understand that instead of chewing tasteless, bad tasting or poisoned gum, they ought to spit it out.
@safari: I think Pelosi's point was that Democrats can walk & chew up Trump at the same time.
@Ken Winkes: According to the NYT report, which I just linked a moment ago, "... the closed door negotiations between a select group of Democrats and Mr. Lighthizer gave them an opportunity to secure multiple policy changes related to prescription drug pricing, the environment, labor protections and dispute settlement.
"That included removing a provision that Democrats criticized as a boon to the pharmaceutical industry. Democrats had objected to provisions governing intellectual property protections for new pharmaceutical products, in particular an advanced class of drugs called biologics, which were given 10 years of protection from cheaper alternatives. Congressional Democrats said those measures could undermine efforts to make American health care more affordable and the revised deal strips out that 10 year protection."
Bea,
Thanks.
Looks like the "Skagit Valley Herald" didn't cover the whole story, probably because they relied on last night's news. Might have to change my mind.
Really liked the "chew up" bit. Worth more wide grin than mere smile.
Have sent an inquiry to the Washington Fair Trade Coalition for more details on the deal. Will let all here know if what I receive from them differs significantly from the Times reporting.
PD, in case your question wasn't rhetorical ("... explain why when they take a vote on something the vote ALWAYS turns out the same ... "):
-- the first vote on those motions is "voice" and after the call the chair declares "the ayes have it". Then the minority automatically asks for a roll call, which the chair cannot deny. Then the clerk calls for by-name votes for each member, majority first then minority. These days the numbers are always the same, straight partisan votes.
The minority asks for roll calls even though everyone knows the outcome because:
1 -- you (generic you) are watching and will think "what a bunch of idiots" -- and part of the GOP governing strategy is to make most people think governmenty-things are stupid and a waste of time. First they get you thinking that (because you are viewing), but then they get the multiplier when you are talking with your friends and relatives and everyone agrees yep, that was stupid and a waste of time. Every little bit of reinforcement helps. Remember ... don't bother to vote, because they're all stupid and wasteful.
2 --- They're baiting the chair -- see how flustered Nadler got before he got his rhythm and started returning every one of those bullshit serves to the baseline. And Nadler actually rehearsed that the night before! To this "roll call" hassle add the minority calling out challenges (Gaetzies), like fielders trying to spook the batter with insult chatter. If they can make the chair look foolish, why, the whole procedure must be foolish, no? Good film clips to that effect at 11 !
3 -- They're dicks. People like Collins, Gaetz, Gohmert actually ENJOY throwing sand in the gears just because they can.
4 -- The record. Although in these types of hearings its party line all the way, in "regular" hearings a roll call vote ensures that members are recorded. Sometimes members want that ("the record shows I supported your favorite thing" ) and sometimes their opponents do ("the record shows that Ms Peedee voted against your favorite thing FIVE times")
I think in these hearings and in the Senate next month the GOP will take every opportunity to make gov work look stupid, as part of the overall plan to discredit people who believe they need to protect the government against the barbarians.
And ... Safari: I'm sure many MCs, both parties, are word whores who say and do whatever they think they can get away with to please their voters. BUT true-believer GOPers, I believe, think that democrats are the advance guard of socialism which leads to communism and revolution, the hanging of bishops and desecration of holy ground. ANYTHING is justified in opposing democrats. Therefore they can do the things they abjur and abhore because those things are needful in the purging of the worst of all evils ... democrats. (Like crusaders killed for Christ.) I think they sleep at night because they have totally swallowed the idea that they can be evil to prevent greater evil.
Logical, no. Evident, yes.
The DNC and the Democrats should already be running ads for President and Congress and local elections
If you want more people to have health insurance - vote Democrat
If you want a more habitable Earth - vote Democrat
If you want fewer school children shot - vote Democrat
If you want the US to move toward racial equality - vote Democrat
If you want equal pay for everyone - vote Democrat
If you want women to control their own bodies - vote Democrat
If you want the rich to pay their fair share - vote Democrat
If you want to fight corruption - vote Democrat
If you want more people to have the right to vote - vote Democrat
If you want the USA to stop abusing children - vote Democrat
If you want Americans to get help with student debt - vote Democrat
If you want fewer people to starve - vote Democrat
If you want to breathe cleaner air - vote Democrat
If you want to drink cleaner water - vote Democrat
If you want people to get help with child care - vote Democrat
If you want America to invest in it's infrastructure - vote Democrat
If you want investment in our public schools - vote Democrat
Or
Support for Trump means you tolerate corruption
Support for Trump means you tolerate racism
Support for Trump means you tolerate sexual assault
Support for Trump means you tolerate child abuse
Support for Trump means you tolerate inequality
Support for Trump means you tolerate intolerance
Support for Trump means you tolerate pollution
Support for Trump means you tolerate gun violence
Support for Trump means you tolerate taking food from the needy
Support for Trump means you tolerate incompetence
Support for Trump means that you don't trust your senses, your instincts or any scientific evidence whatsoever that climate change is a real threat to life on earth, including that of your children and grandchildren.
Great list, RAS. Thanks.
I think that about covers it.
With your permission, I'll use it here and there.
@Patrick: Yeah, in yesterday's hearing -- after the proceedings had been in progress for 2-1/2 hours with no break -- Republicans made Nadler take a roll call vote on a bathroom break. Harassment? Nah.
@Ken Winkes: Feel free to use the list
Bea,
Or with the exception of one female committee member, maybe not only harrassment. Maybe prostate problems, too.
Good riddance to Ted Yoho. It won't make any difference as the district has a slew of potential misrepresentatives with the magical qualifying (R) following their name on the ballot.
I see Bill the Toad(y) says the FBI in its investigation of the Pretender 2016 campaign may have acted in "bad faith."
Does he mean with intent to deceive? Or is he playing philosopher now, where the meaning is "refusal to confront facts," which would make the entire Republican Party, including Bill, paragons of the practice.
I'll go with the latter.